20 Reasons Not to Vote

1. If one votes, one participates. If one participates, one condones and endorses the process, and subsequently, what those elected ‘representatives’ do and say in your name.

2. Electoral promises are meaningless because politicians are able to lie to gain the favour of the electorate, and then do exactly what they want once they have it. Then there is no accountability or recourse, other than waiting another 4 years or so to vote them out and replace them with someone else who will follow the established template and do the exact same thing.

3. The act of voting grants legitimacy to the idea that it’s acceptable for the majority/collective to use the coercive arm of the state to impose their will on the minority/individual using force, or threat of force, and for that reason, it is immoral to vote. As such, the only way to truly de-legitimise the system is by not voting. When the people refuse to participate in droves the international community can no longer recognise the results of the election as legitimate. This perceived legitimacy is such a concern for politicians that in some countries it’s now a legal requirement to vote (e.g., Australia).

4. A non-voter emerges from the electoral process with a clean conscience because they can legitimately proclaim that what the elected ‘representatives’ subsequently say and do after they have gained power is not done in their name, not with their permission, and not with their encouragement.

5. To not vote DOES NOT mean one relinquishes the right to then comment on, complain about, or protest the actions of the government, it is completely the other way round. When one votes one effectively makes a contractual agreement (the voter is officially recorded doing so), which hands over the right for someone else to speak and act in their name, and as such, assents to whatever the government does thereafter. A non-voter however, has not done so, and therefore retains the right to complain, object and protest all they want.

6. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) reinforces the idea that people can’t live together without violent control.

7. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) implies that the majority knows what’s best for everyone.

8. Participation in the system (i.e., voting) implies that the majority knows what’s best for the individual.

9. Voting is effectively participating in mob rule, and the mob then enforces it’s views on the rest of society with the threat of violence.

10. By voting, an individual literally advocates the use of force against peaceful people.

11. Voting reinforces the idea the ‘people’ have the power rather than the largely unaccountable bureaucrats who make the rules.

13. Statistically, any one vote makes no more difference than a single grain of sand on a beach. Thinking that their vote counts tends to give the voter a mistakenly inflated sense of self-worth, and participation in a system creates a passive sense of accomplishment.

14. An individual’s ability to make an informed choice is zero if the only information they reference is from the overtly bias main stream media, government news channels (propaganda), politicians and party manifestos (sales pitch), or from an ‘enforced’ state school education (indoctrination).

15. Voting sends a false signal to the elected politicians that the voter approves of all their policies. Voters therefore encourage them.

16. If an individual has not come to firm conclusion about the election, that individual will do more for their country/community by not voting, rather than making a mistake.

17. If the outcome of a vote is unknown, then voting is tantamount to gambling. If the outcome of a vote is known, then voting is futile.

18. No individual has the authority to make laws their neighbour, or anyone else, must obey. Then how is it morally acceptable for any individual to delegate authority they don’t have to someone else, such as a politician?

19. Should people who know more about game shows, sports, reality TV and celebrities, rather than matters of any real importance (economics, political philosophy, history, logic, critical thinking, etc) be in a position to vote and influence the lives of others?

20. Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting evil.

The 20 reasons not to vote boil down to this:

If you are not a Voluntaryist, then by definition you are an Involuntaryist, and as such, personally advocate the initiation of force, or threat of force against people who haven’t threatened or harmed anyone. Therefore, for every person in the world one of these statements is true:

1) “I advocate a society whereby people are free to voluntarily interact with one another.”
2) “I advocate the use of force, or threat of force, against innocent people, in order to make them comply with my opinions and preferences.”

I tell people I have absolutely no interest in ruling their lives.
I also have no interest in having somebody else ruling their lives on my behalf…
I have yet to hear a reasoned argument why anyone think they should have the right to rule others against their will.

If we vote for corruption that is what we will get. If we give our consent to be dictated to for the term of office no matter who we vote for we are voting for our own dictators. I like that you do not support the representational government who will dictate to you what they will do even if it is selling their votes to highest bidder.

I register a vote for what I believe in. I am a Libertarian and always will be. We have rarely given them the chance to govern except for a few occasions they were elected to high office under political aliases like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. VOTE FOR JOHNSON/WELD!

Perhaps in the first world you may enjoy the luxury of abstinence implying deligitimization… Wake up! as if anyone’s looking for your consent first…
If its the last chance to stand up against looming facism towards martial rule being imposed by a selfish despot.. i guess you could hide under your bed.. Or join a united voice commanding change before its silenced by force..

And when the loss is on a marginal 1% lead for the fuhrer… Folk like you suddenly distance yourselves from your regretably wasteful rhetoric… Not so?

Stay home hide away and justify a lack of participation to be a sensible survival tactic once your freedom of speech is gone..

The story above is choosing the easy, i’m not accountable card. On this scale not voting is the Same as blindly following the masses.. If those with some decent intellect decide not to vote, then the idiots who will vote for one of these 2 evils will become More powerfull. (The dumb leading the masses.) if you want a change Make sure that the votes for these 2 fuckheads are being countered by votes for a thirth Party, send a visible signal.. not voting is not a visible system. they will not change because People dont vote.. they dont care, you only Make it look like you also dont Carr who is in charge.. Actively try to get People to vote, Just dont vote forntrump or Clinton.. All vote for the Same thirth Party guy. Make the world see that you are not brainwashen by the media hype.

Does it make a difference if I vote for the third guy who is funded by the same people funding the two main guys? Voting is futile because I don’t need a political party to make it in life. In fact, I would have a better chance in life without them. I will always enjoy the same shit privileges (which I am not asking for) advanced to us, without voting. Like you rightfully say that they don’t care, whether you vote or not! So what the hell?

I don’t necessarily agree with all you said but in general I think you are right. I only wanted to add one thing, we only elect the people that we deserve. This 2016 election is a big mascaraed that has been orchestrated and involves tons of money, money, money and money. Nothing else.
Elected by the people for the people has been changed by “A small dominant class comprised of powerful members who exert total control over the general population”. I call that an oligarchy.

The US is dying from a million cuts. Part of the reason the USA is a nanny police state now is that whenever there is a problem, the kneejerk reaction in the US is to call for a new law.

Nanny state laws are not the best solution, however. Nanny state laws lead to more laws, higher fines, and tougher sentences. Thirty years ago, DWI laws were enacted that led to DWI checkpoints and lower DWI levels. Seatbelt laws led to backseat seatbelt laws, childseat laws, and pet seatbelt laws. Car liability insurance laws led to health insurance laws and gun liability laws. Smoking laws that banned smoking in buildings led to laws against smoking in parks and then bans against smoking in entire cities. Sex offender registration laws led to sex offender restriction laws and violent offender registration laws.

Nanny state laws don’t make us safer, either. Nanny state laws lead people to be careless since they don’t need to have personal responsibility anymore. People don’t need to be careful crossing the street now because drunk-driving has been outlawed and driving while using a cellphone is illegal. People don’t investigate companies or carry out due diligence because businesses must have business licenses now.

The main point of nanny state laws is not safety. The main purposes of more laws are control and revenue generation for the state.

Another reason laws are enacted is because corporations give donations to lawmakers to stifle competition or increase sales.

Many laws are contradictory, too. Some laws say watering lawns is required, while other laws say watering lawns is illegal.

Many nanny state laws that aim to solve a problem can be fixed by using existing laws. If assault is already illegal, why do we need a new law that outlaws hitting umpires?

Nanny state laws are not even necessary. If everything was legal would you steal, murder, and use crack cocaine? Aren’t there other ways to solve problems besides calling the police? Couldn’t people educate or talk to people who bother them? Couldn’t people be sued for annoying behavior? Couldn’t people just move away? Even if assault was legal, wouldn’t attackers risk being killed or injured, too? Do people have consciences? Having no laws doesn’t mean actions have no consequences.

If there is no victim, there is no crime.

We don’t need thousands of laws when we only need 10.

Freedom is not just a one way street. You can only have freedom for yourself if you allow others to have it.

Should swimming pools be banned because they are dangerous? Hammers? Bottles? Rocks? Energy drinks? Pillows?

Control freaks might get angry when a neighbor owns three indoor cats, but what did the neighbor take from them? Why should this be illegal? Is outlawing cats something a free country should do? Doesn’t banning everything sound like the opposite of freedom?

Instead of getting mad at people who like freedom, why don’t people realize that freedom is a two way street?

Thank you for this old post! Midterm elections are in a week or so, and I am absolutely sick of all the “go vote!” propaganda. Especially the whole “if you don’t vote, you can’t complain” mantra. I hope you don’t mind, but I linked this post on my own blog. Gotta spread this message like good butter!

Great list! Thoroughly enjoyed. I would expand/change 12. It’s not just that the better financed candidate wins, it’s that the candidate financed to make us think they won, wins. Selected not elected. The 2016 election hinged on the needs of the Fed.

Quite simply the country was about to crash – the EU had sent the oil Market Into a tailspin after collectively dumping oil for natural gas energy. Oil producing countries that valuate the dollar by investing in US Treasury Bonds were being reported by Reuters right before the election that they were not going to buy the bonds, they’d abandon the system, meaning they would also sell off their bonds. The result would be crash from the sell-off, dollar recession and implosion in the face of debt. The value would drop out completely of both bonds and the dollar and it would spell the end of global banking. Nearly every central bank in the world has either bought or been lended Treasury Bonds, holding US debt meaning that they are paid dividends from this stock. This floods their banks with dollars.. This crash would spell the end of the treasury and dollar as the largest reserve currency and trade standard (including it’s use in buying oil, or any energy for that matter).

What would change this? Oil reductions. Global oil reductions, which I had been watching Obama try for quite unsuccessfully. Bombing Libya whenever they refused, getting denied by the opposing oil group lead by Russia… Right before the election, Russia announced that they would not trust Clinton – in direct reference to the promises that she would have to make for their cooperation on global oil reductions. Clearly they trusted Trump, due to past affiliation. So, miraculously, we get Trump, who gets global oil reductions practically on election night. And we don’t actually find Russia at the heart of this election scandal (an election no one seems to believe) but Cambridge Analytica- a military psy ops contractor that helps our military seed revolutions and political upsets, or rather the illusion of them, by creating fake profiles on social media, fake revolutions (Egypt, Syria etc). They are hired by the hedge fund holder funding Trump, Robert Mercer, who belongs to a private-in-hand-with-government think tank. This is exactly what Chomsky means by the money decides elections – the money is just a tool for those who make the decisions… And it is successful! Oil reductions double the price of oil, stimulate bond investment and petrodollar recycling, valuating Bonds so that they continue to flood banks the world over with dollars. The US economy does not crash, booming with oil among high prices (the only country enforcing the pact but not Heald to it, the US produces and sells as much as possible) – the dollar doesn’t fail, and it buys the US more time to figure out how to get large bodies such as the EU and China to buy natural gas from the USA before the dollar goes out with oil for the final time..

But Trump and Russia are both fooled. Oh sure, we can see the promises Trump made to Russia for their oil reductions cooperation – he tried to lift Sanctions right away and Flynn’s bust also made that obvious. Slightly less obvious, perhaps, is his promise to back off Syria, to back off Russia’s natural gas pipelines feeding up to the EU, but I was able to predict it months ahead with related Gazprom predictions, and by March 30, 2017, Trump informs the UN we’re no longer asking Assad to step down.

It’s all fine until June when Russia is deep in reductions, and the deep state wants to break these promises with a Sanctions Bill – that Trump loudly and publicly won’t sign.. Then this FBI investigation appears… And we know what happened- he’s cowed and brought to heel to turn on his Russian buddies and support false flag in London against Russia. By the time he enforces the Sanctions this April he’s thoroughly in line, we see headlines “why these sanctions took a year” Among “Trump no longer target, just subject of FBI”.

So what is this story? A story where the bank decided our election based on their needs, who used the move for their goals, and then pulled the rug out from under the puppet. And this is probably the closest we’ve gotten to having someone not completely bought and sold by the bank, although that didn’t last long. No surprise there.

Our vote doesn’t count because it literally does not count. It is inconsequential to the powers that be. The deliberately uninformed masses are NOT deciding ANYTHING.

12. Money decides the illusion of voting. The bank decides who we get. This is sharply evident with the controversial Trump election and the advent of his achievement of global oil reductions practically on election night. Without which, the country would have crashed last year. Our vote literally doesn’t count. We are deliberately misinformed and we are not deciding anything. It is a show, and a lie.